Friday, 12 May 2017

Woman-in-Purple

1. Introduction

One of our blog readers in Nov 2013 aptly defined Praia da Luz as the VILLAGE OF THE DAMNED, due to the many negative peculiarities that have been
attributed to this village because of the Maddie affair – the latest
being a nanny saying that it was also a rape-haven location – it has, or
so it seems to have, a very positive peculiarity related to the case:
the elderly who live there, their memory improves with time.

But only the elderly.

First
we had Mrs Fenn who only remembers almost 4 months after it happened
that she heard a child crying in the McCann apartment for one and
quarter hours.

Now we have Jenny Murat remembering things she saw on May 3 2007, first in 2009, then in 2015 and now ten years after Maddie disappeared.

2. The Mystery woman

In
the Madeleine case we should never be surprised to be surprised but we
were on this occasion. Out of the blue comes the Woman-in-Purple again.

Here we have a description of a woman acting
suspiciously outside the McCann apartment just two hours before Maddie
was allegedly abducted.

She’s described as a slim,
Portuguese-looking woman, wearing a plum-coloured top and white skirt,
long, dark swept-back hair, spotted at 20:00 standing under a street
light at the crossroads 40 feet away from the apartment.

The
Express was informed by a mystery woman who has lived in Praia da Luz
for more than 30 years and was speaking from her villa near the Ocean
Club. That night she went to the supermarket just before it closed at
8pm and besides seeing the Woman-in-Purple, she almost collided with a
small, brown car with an English–looking man driving.

(How does one decide a driver is English- looking as opposed to German, French!?)

At the time of writing, we asked whether this mystery woman who wished to remain anonymous was Mrs Fenn or Mrs Murat.

Readers’ comments seemed to agree with us that she was more likely to be Mrs Jenny Murat and time has proved us to be correct.

The
first comment we received was to point out what was obvious to those
who had studied the PJ files carefully. “Sounds like Jane Tanner.
Wilkins said he saw her outside the apartments in a purple top. Hair
sounds right, she looks swarthy could be Portuguese.”

We agreed with that comment but one thing we did wonder: could Jane Tanner be described as slim?

She
certainly wasn’t fat but maybe better described as well-built in
comparison to the other women in the group? We’ll return to this point
later.

What distinguishes this article from more recent reports
of the Woman-in-Purple is the link to “the pockmarked prowler seen
several times outside the apartment in the day leading up to the
kidnap.”

The recent press reports make no mention of Pimpleman
(also known as Spottyman) in relation to the Woman-in-Purple.

Can we now
expect him to be named as the most recent suspect or have things moved
on since 2009?

3. Jenny Murat, the mystery woman

The recent reports, all this month, clearly identify Jenny Murat as the witness to the Woman-in-Purple.

She
had already been revealed in 2015 by James Murray in his Express article we have already mentioned; “Maddie libel detective ruined: Retirement retreat seized
to cover McCann payout”:

“Jenny
Murat, 78, the mother of wrongly accused Robert Murat, has potentially
breakthrough evidence but no one has spoken to her. At 8pm on May 3,
2007, she went to a supermarket and then drove past Apartment 5a and saw
a woman hanging around. Her notes from the time say: “There was a woman
standing on the corner under a lamp post.“I don’t remember much
of her other than she was of slight build and was wearing a plum
coloured jacket. She moved around the lamp post as if trying not to be
noticed.”

“A
mysterious ‘woman in purple’ is the prime suspect British cops are
thought to be searching for in connection with the disappearance of
Madeleine McCann.”Jenny Murat claims she saw a mysterious
Woman-in-Purple on the night Madeleine and “told how she remembers
seeing the female loitering outside the very apartment from which Maddie
was snatched just TWO HOURS before the child’s distraught mum Kate
discovered she was missing in 2007.”

The article continues:

“The
woman in purple, whose name is being withheld by police, has become the
latest focus of Scotland Yard’s high profile operation to find the
girl’s kidnapper.Met Police believe the woman is a prime suspect
and may hold the key to Maddie’s fate – but incredibly they are thought
to have never quizzed potential witness Mrs Murat.But they did
talk to Brit holidaymaker Jeremy Wilkins, a tennis playing holiday pal
of Maddie’s dad, who had also spotted a woman lurking in the area.”

4. The Woman-in-Purple and Jez Wilkins

Wilkins made his rogatory statement on April 8 2008

“I
left the apartment around 20.30. I calculate I met Gerry on the road
between 20.45 and 21.15. I am aware of the importance of this hour and
am also aware that the media announced our meeting time as 21.05. Even
if this were correct, I have no idea where such information originated.
It is not possible to give you a more exact time… I left my apartment
pushing my son’s pram so that he could sleep... looked to the building
block where the McCann apartment was situated and saw a woman dressed in
purple clothing. I referred to this woman in relation to the questions
asked by Jane Tanner… I do not remember having seen her when I spoke
with Gerry, but I believe I saw her when I first ventured out. She was
stopped on the street in front of one of the group’s apartments when I
passed her down towards the exit to my apartment. I do not know if it
was her apartment or not. I remember she was wearing the colour PURPLE.”
(our caps)

Can we deduce from this: the police know the name of
the woman if they are able to withhold it and that they consider her a
suspect, even though they haven’t interviewed Mrs Murat?

Is it
possible that they considered Jeremy Wilkinson’s rogatory interview more
reliable, when he describes seeing Jane Tanner outside the McCann
apartment around 8.30 wearing purple?

Why would his rogatory interview be more reliable than Jenny Murat’s, made on May 15 2007?

Perhaps
because then Jenny made no mention of seeing a Woman-in-Purple or a near
collision with a small car driven by a British- looking man in her PJ
interview.

4. Woman-in-Purple and the Ocean Club

Says Kandohla, in her article:

“It
is understood from sources close to the investigation that the woman
had a connection to a worker at the resort where the McCanns were
staying.A police insider yesterday said they were ready to “move
in” and arrest the woman, who is not currently living in Portugal, in
the latest “hugely significant line of inquiry.””

This seems to
be contradictory information; having interviewed Wilkins, who saw Jane,
they are now looking for a suspect connected to an Ocean Club worker, not
CURRENTLY living in Portugal, which doesn’t appear to describe Jane.

And
as they haven’t interviewed Jenny Murat, we are certain it can’t be
believed she saw ANOTHER Woman-in-Purple around the same time.

5. Slim v slight

Jenny’s
description of the Woman-in-Purple varies from 2009 where she’s
described as “slim” but in 2015 she tells James Murray that “I don’t
remember much of her other than she was of SLIGHT build and was wearing a
plum coloured jacket. She moved around the lamp post as if trying not
to be noticed.” (our caps)

“Slight”, which is not the same as
slim. Slight implies both small in stature and build, which is not a
good description of Jane, in our opinion.

In that 2015 Express article:

“Jenny
Murat, 78, the mother of wrongly accused Robert Murat, has potentially
breakthrough evidence but no one has spoken to her. At 8pm on May 3,
2007, she went to a supermarket and then drove past apartment and saw a
woman hanging around. Her notes from the time [oddly not included or mentioned in PJ interview] say: “There was a woman standing on the corner under a
lamppost.I don’t remember much of her other than she was of
SLIGHT build and was wearing a plum-coloured jacket. She moved around
the lamppost as if trying not to be noticed [she would need to be slight to hide behind a lamppost!]”

Another case of LP failing to pass information on to OG?

6. The 2009 Jenny’s Murat route, by Murray in 2009

This is the route Jenny Murat must have driven to the Baptista supermarket:

Above, are the distances
(every red marker is 50 metres) between the Murat’s property and the
Baptista supermarket and the street lights that exist on Rua Dr.
Professor Gentil Martins:

There
are two pieces of information that the reader has to be aware of, and
that is the distances that are involved and the fact that Rua Professor
Dr Gentil Martins is a one way street.

On May 10 2009, the mystery woman – who we now know to be Jenny Murat said the following:

“A
WOMAN was seen acting suspiciously outside Kate and Gerry McCann’s
apartment just an hour before their daughter Madeleine was abducted.The
slim, Portuguese-looking woman in a plum-coloured top and white skirt
with long, dark, swept-back hair acted furtively when she was spotted at
8pm on May 3 in 2007 near the Mark Warner Ocean Club complex.She
was standing under a streetlight at a crossroads only 40 feet from
where Madeleine was sleeping with her brother Sean and his twin sister
Amelie.Investigators are being urged to find her to see if she
was in any way connected to a pockmarked prowler seen several times
outside the apartment in the day leading up to the kidnap.Details
of the mystery woman have only just become known after a Sunday Express
investigation into the baffling case was alerted by an elderly British
woman who has lived in Praia da Luz on Portugal’s Algarve for more than
30 years.Speaking from her villa near the Ocean Club, the woman,
who has asked not to be named, recalled: “On that night I went to the
supermarket at the bottom of the road just before it closed at 8pm.“As I drove past the entrance to the Ocean Club I saw a woman standing opposite Apartment 5A the McCanns were staying in.“Even
at that time of night the streets were deserted, so I was surprised to
see someone there. I remember thinking it was unusual because it is just
not the sort of place you would hang around.“As I drove up to
the junction she stepped around to the other side of the street lamp as
though she didn’t want me to look at her. She was not carrying a bag or a
mobile phone. I thought she might have been waiting for a lift but no
car came along while I was there.”

We are not certain which street light she’s referring to, is #1 or #2:

Street
light #1 doesn’t look like it to be on a crossroads, as it’s clear it’s an
access to a parking area but is around 40 feet from 5A.

Street light #2, does look to be on a crossroads but is much further than the 40 feet.

But
it seems to be under this one as Jenny only sees the woman when
passing the Ocean Club entrance and “as I drove up to the junction she
stepped around to the other side of the street lamp”

Quite
remarkable to notice the colour the woman was dressed in, that she
didn’t have a mobile or a handbag and that she moved to the other side
of the street lamp and she was looking at Apartment 5A. This last
observation must have been through the rear-view mirror.

We find
it strange she was looking at 5A as we have been told she tried to avoid
being seen by Mrs Murat, so would be looking at her and not at the
apartment in this very short encounter.

We would think she
would be looking at Mrs Murat, trying not to be seen by her. Remember
Jenny was going “to the supermarket at the bottom of the road just
before it closed at 8”, so we suppose, in a hurry.

She continues:

“I turned right and could see quite clearly she was looking at Apartment 5A”“As I approached another junction a small, brown car, with just one English-looking man in it swung round and nearly hit mine.”

As we will later see, it’s very
important that she says she turns right and then on the next junction
and she almost has an accident with an English-looking driver.

She can only turn right on these two locations:

Turning right on A, there’s no next junction, so it wasn’t there, confirming that the Woman-in-Purple was under street light #2.

Turning
at B, at Rua Joaquim Teixeira, means that she is clearly stating the
accident almost happened at the entrance to the Baptista supermarket
parking area, the next junction after turning right.

Please note that Rua Joaquim Teixeira is a one way ONLY way AFTER the junction to the entrance of the parking lot.

Between that junction and the Rua Professor
Dr Gentil Martins it’s a two-way street.

So, in this route, the only one-way street she drives in is Rua Professor
Dr Gentil Martins.

7. The Jenny Murat route, by Kandohla in 2017

“She
told how she had driven to get some shopping when she was on her way
home at around 8pm and saw a woman standing by a lamppost.Mrs
Murat added: “It was the middle of the evening and I saw the woman
standing on the corner of the street just watching intently.“I don’t know who she was but she caught my eye because she was dressed in purple-plum clothes.“It
struck me as strange because it’s so unusual for anyone, particularly a
woman, to be standing alone on the street in our resort, just watching a
building.“The next morning we heard that a little girl had gone missing and I later told police about the woman I’d seen right outside.“It
was unusual to see a woman standing alone. I didn’t recognise her and
don’t have a clue who she is but is seems a bit suspicious.”

Here she only sees Woman-in-Purple after she leaves the supermarket.

As we said it is important to remember that Rua Professor Dr Gentil Martins is a one way street.

This means that for Mrs Murat to return to her villa from the supermarket she has to go the following way:

As we said now she can only have seen the woman when returning home when in 2009 it was on the way to it.

So
for her to see the Woman-in-Purple it can only be in the T-Junction
between Rua Agostinho da Silva and Rua Professor Dr Gentil Martins, very, very near apartment 5A and nowhere near any Ocean Club entrance she
spoke so clearly of in 2009.

“She
said she also remembers seeing a mysterious “Woman-in-Purple” loitering
outside the apartment from which Maddie went missing.

Jenny told how she was struck by the “bizarre behaviour” of the stranger staring at the flat.Mrs
Murat added: “It was the middle of the evening and I saw the woman
standing on the corner of the street just watching intently."I
noticed her there and she kind of looked as if she was trying to hide
from me. I do remember she was wearing a plum-coloured top.”

This seems to confirm the Kandohla 2017 version contradicting the Murray 2009 one, as in the last the woman was not on a corner but near the Tapas complex entrance.

But what is interesting is what she says about the car:“A
BRITISH gran claims she saw a car driving the wrong way towards the
apartment Madeleine McCann disappeared from ten years ago.Jenny
Murat, who lives 100 yards from the Ocean Club complex where the McCanns
were staying, said the vehicle looked like a rental motor driven by a
“British looking man”.

(…)

Speaking about the sighting for
the first time, Mrs Murat told BBC Breakfast the car was driving the
wrong way down a one-way street.She said: “It was one of the small cars, like the rental cars – the normal, everyday sort of rental cars.“I saw the driver, I was beside the driver. Both of us looked at each other. I think he had a very British look about him.”

As
we saw, the only one way road she went in in the 2009 version was Rua
Professor Dr Gentil Martins, and whoever would be driving the wrong way
would be going up it and not down.

And if it was on this road,
then she first almost collides with this car, and then only sees the
Woman-in-Purple when returning home.

Basically in the opposite order of
what she stated in 2009.

Was the one-way street the Rua Joaquim Teixeira, after exiting the supermarket and turning right?

Current
Google Maps shows clearly that only one car at a time can pass it, but
even if it were so, how on earth would she know he was driving towards
apartment 5A there?

9. Murray 2015 v Murray 2009

We have already seen in 2009 Jenny says her near car accident was near the Baptista supermarket.

But in 2015 she says the crash was when arriving home after going to the supermarket:

“As she turned into the
driveway of her home, Casa Liliana, she was nearly hit by a car going
the wrong way. “When I stopped to open the gates I could not see the car
but the woman was in the road looking in my direction.””

10. Jane Tanner as the Woman-in-Purple?

Is
Jenny trying to deflect attention away from Jane Tanner as the
Woman-in-Purple? Is it really feasible that 2 Women-in-Purple were seen
in the same place, at the same time? We don’t think so.

Whoever the Woman-in-Purple
is, the police, according to the Sun report, “want to know exactly
where she was on the night that Madeleine was taken from the apartment.”
(note, “taken”)

If Woman-in-Purple was Jane Tanner, she was seen
by Jenny at 20:00. She was then seen by Wilkins around 20:30 when she
also made a phone call to her friend Charlotte Gorrod, before leaving for the
alleged dining at the Tapas restaurant at 20:30.

Note that Jez Wilkins in his first statement to the police does not mention the Woman-in-Purple.

He
says “that yesterday, between 20:30 and 21 pm, when he was at the bar
"TAPAS"”, which means it was after he crossed with the Woman-in-Purple.

Please
note that Jez Wilkins goes straight from his apartment to the Tapas Bar
area toilets, and the reason why we called the post “The Bladderman”, the one in which we show the
various contradictions between his statements.

This means that the Woman-in-Purple he sees cannot be where he sees her and at Tapas at the same time.

For
example in his second statement he says “Our son was awake and unable to
sleep. I decided to take him for a walk in his pram. I left about 8:15
to 8:30 pm.”, taking 15 minutes off his initial assessment.

11. Jane Tanner v Woman-in-Purple

It’s evident that a significant effort has been made, especially recently, to dissociate Jane Tanner from the Woman-in-Purple, to downplay the importance of the character.

Jenny
Murat who when giving a statement to the PJ in 2007 remembers hearing
sirens in the distance, which a fact absolutely irrelevant to the fact a
girl had disappeared from an apartment 100 yards from her villa but
forgets to mention what she saw: a suspicious woman that evening looking at that same apartment.

And, apparently she had that in her notes!

Maybe
it was because the difference between 2007 and 2009 was the fact that the
files were released in 2008 and only then was it public that Jez had placed Jane
Tanner where and when she was not to be supposed to be and so
another Woman-in-Purple was created.

By saying that she didn’t
know who the Woman-in-Purple was Jenny Murat is stating quite clearly
that Jez’s Woman-in-Purple was not Jane Tanner but some other woman who
happened to be half an hour earlier wearing the same coloured clothing
and standing not where Jez says he saw Tanner

It is quite surprising that Tanner’s defense comes from the mother of the man the group made sure the bus went over.

To be very clear, it
was NOT the T9 who threw Murtat under the bus.

Mr Amaral, by
sheer coincidence when being in Luz one evening, happened to see Murat
drive into his property and asked a fellow PJ officer about the man and
what he heard for an answer made Mr Amaral be suspicious of him and ordered he be put under
surveillance.

Murat had already indicated on May 5 that things were
going wrong his way, so we think he very quickly realised he was under
surveillance soon after Mr Amaral ordered it.

The other side seeing the
opportunity to have someone to throw under the bus seized it and made sure that the bus went over the man,
backed up over him again and over him again it went by ordering the T9 to do just that.

The Woman-in-Purple frightens the other side. So does Euclides Monteiro-

Robert Murat is again quoted on something he has said before:

“I think everybody who was around at the time, holidaymakers and people at the Ocean Club, should be interviewed again.The timeline needs to be made crystal clear because there is still so much confusion, such a mess.”

Goncalo Amaral would surely agree with the latter statement? We certainly do.

Post Scriptum in response to Doug D’s comment:

These pictures from the South end of Rua Professor Dr Gentil Martins clearly shows that it’s a one-way street, from North to South.

Note in the last picture the no-way sign is turned for drivers approaching it from Rua Joaquim Teixeira, or as we said when exiting the Baptista supermarket and turning left.

When we visited Luz a couple years ago we drove in Rua Professor Dr Gentil Martins twice.

Probably not particularly relevant, unless it can tie JM down to where she was when she met a car going the wrong way, but is the Rua Professor Dr Gentil Martins in fact one way?

There are ‘no entry’ signs outside the Baptista Supermarket to stop people turning into the road from there, up the hill, but nothing to say ‘turn right’ for cars coming away from the OC tennis court turning, or ‘turn left’ from either of the two turnings opposite.

In the roads around, all the other turnings into one-way streets, including coming out from the Baptista car park seem to be well signposted.

I agree that it's no entry turning into the road by the Baptista, but they don't make the road 'one-way' as there is nothing to stop people turning left up the hill coming out from the tennis courts, or turning right up the hill from the two apartment roads opposite.Also there is a turn right sign coming out of Baptista car park, so you shouldn't be turning left from there.(I've taken screen shots but it won't let me post them here)

No, we thought it was obvious from this post we were being ironic about memory improvement of elderly ladies.

By showing the inconsistencies of what Jenny Murat has said in different occasions, we think obvious that we don't believe what she has said.

About Mrs Fenn, being the only blog who has repeatedly said we don't believe in her, like in our post "All paths lead to Rome" among many others, we can't honestly understand your question.http://textusa.blogspot.pt/2010/11/all-paths-lead-to-rome.html

Hi textusa,Was JT with Russell on the morning 4 May 2007 looking for Madeleine,when Russell took(RM)to meet Gerry?(JT)Bob Small,Goncalo Amaral,have JT hidden in a van,where they have RM walk past and JT identifies Robert Murat as the abductor?Prior to JT being placed in the van. JT was with Russell,Bob Small close to Casa Lilanna,actively seeing the Portugal PJ,have RM in custody,casting aspersions on the Identification of the Lead Suspect?Then we have the"Mystery DNA"from the Burgau Apartments,possibly being connected to JT,RM?now throw into the Mix JM Alibi for her Son on 3 May 2007?Purple Woman,I would say Rachel Oldfield,as per looking like a Portuguese Woman if we are going for a simulation plan(JM)Identification?

I think its clear as the day is long that JM has been lying ..she was required to after the release of the Police files. For her not to mention either Purple lady nor the car incident in 2007 tells us it didnt happen. But in 2009 after it was known that JW had identified JT in purple, outside 5A at that time, someone had to come forward to avert disaster ( anon then ). Who better than RM Mum...she wld be least suspected of lying to support JT afterall that had happened to her son. So JM is under instruction to lie ( as you have clearly shown she has done in this post)...Shes doing as shes been told to for a reason, my guess is she was knowingly involved in the concealment of the body. If she wasnt she has no reason to lie. JW placing JT couldnt be erased its in the files...so confusion tactics required once more. How they must wish JW hadnt responded so fully to the question of seeing JT that evening?

Excellent read, as always, and so much detailed research. Thanks, Textusa. Very unreliable statements from Mrs Murat in my opinion and all part of the great cover up, no doubt. I'm not sure about Mrs Fenn as didn't Kate McCann 'speak' to her to allegedly frighten her off? I thought I read that somewhere. In any case, one always gets 'witnesses' coming forward who take sides very early on in a crime and 'modify' their knowledge/observations to favour guilty or innocent. Looking forward to Textusas' next posting. Thanks

A whistleblower.This is why OG can never be confident if they produce a whitewash or archival report.There is always the potential for a retired or serving officer to blow the whistle.This is without even considering that one of the many people involved in the events of PdL could do exactly the same.

Also, you and people like you are making a difference writing blogs, brave Amaral, people on Facebook digging for the truth, brave Colin Sutton speaking out, people on Twitter and people on YouTube speaking out all those things are really making a difference. The truth of this case will eventually come out and once that happens loyalties will change.

As a separate issue I've just watched the latest documentary on Jon Bennett Ramsey which is similar to the McCann case as it was implied in the doc that there was political interference from the start, the sibling is suing CBS which could open a can of worms in this case.

Anyway thanks for the time you spend researching I enjoy reading your blog.

[quote]A source said: “He is still a respected face in the Portuguese police community.[/quote]Couple that with the PJ saying it matters not if OG close the PJ is not dependent on them,there you have reasons why OG cannot and will not close,they no not what the PJ are up to.

The more the British tabloids are shouting 'innocent parents, bad cop', the more the meaning of 'innocence' is discredited. Madeleine's face as a three year old, that's innocence. How can you continue to sell it without shame?If I was Mrs Kate McCann, that face would chase me day after day. What a devastating choice she made after the disappearance of her daughter. If you are innocent, you don't have to tell it, time after time, year after year.

How Kate and Gerry McCann presented to the world was created for them by a PR firm who wanted to keep the focus on them and away from what was going on in PDL. I worked in an airport when a celebrity family were coming off a plane, their advisors where arranging them to walk in a line, the baby was taken through separately as she was unsettled, makeup and hair was touched up, baseball caps were provided for the boys and fixed in a super cool way. No doubt the photographs taken by waiting photographers showed a super unstressed family casually strolling through the airport looking gorgeous and relaxed despite the long journey.People buy into these false images as a lot of people did with the McCanns and thus you create a large fan base of support which focuses on them and away from the reality of this case. If they had hid away pretty soon people would have started ask question but throw the public a celebrity family and that kept them occupied. The image created for Clarence Mitchell was the opposite but had the same effect give the public a face that they would never get tired beating and they will focus on that and away from what really matters. Look at him last week looking at the camera and saying how ludicrous it was that 2 DOCTOR’S would kill their daughter. Instead of ignoring that for the pretentious statement it was and focusing on what that program was really telling us it started a frenzy about people’s perception of doctors and led to discussions like Doctor Shipman. Remember people you were being manipulated by skilled PR firms who know how to work you which is why programmes like big brother attract such high rating. Kate and Gerry McCann are unique people in that they played their part to a tee. You have to wonder about the mentality of people able to pull that off given the circumstances but I don’t think they will ever have a minute’s peace over it all. Even in the case of the celebrity family the mother did put a bit of a protest up because the baby was upset and the photo shoot was delayed for a time until she was ready to let them take her.

Scotland Yard's six-year investigation into Madeleine McCann's disappearance was a poisoned chalice laced with critical errors because of a high level agenda to not interrogate the child's parents, according to a former UK detective.

The explosive revelations were made by retired Metropolitan Police homicide cop Colin Sutton, who at one time was touted as a possible candidate to lead Operation Grange and the search for Maddie, now missing for 10 years.

Operation Grange's narrow remit to focus only on the theory that the four-year-old was abducted from the family's holiday apartment in Portugal was unusual and a "missed opportunity", Sutton told nine.com.au.

In 2010, with planning underway to launch Operation Grange, Sutton received a phone tip off from "a very senior Metropolitan police officer", warning him about the looming investigation and how it would be handled.

The insider told Sutton, who served 30 years with London's Met before retiring in 2011, that the dozens of murder detectives assigned to Operation Grange would be instructed where they could and couldn't look.

"I immediately assumed that what was meant was that the [McCann] family and Tapas 7 [the group of seven friends on holiday with the McCanns] were a no-go area," Sutton said.

In May 2011, when Operation Grange was launched, the detective's instincts were proven correct.

The "crucial phrase", as Sutton calls it, in the Operation Grange remit was a line stating the review would be carried out "as if the abduction occurred in the UK".

That meant Kate and Gerry McCann, despite several concerning inconsistencies in their witness statements, were not to be looked at, Sutton said.

"It was almost this unspoken elephant in the room," he told nine.com.au.

"The rest of [the remit] is really of little consequence after that because that's sort of saying … we are only treating this as an abduction and we are not looking at any other scenario."

Sutton also hit out at Scotland Yard claims that the McCanns, who have always denied any involvement in the disappearance of Madeleine, had been cleared by Portugal's police force, the Policia Judiciaria (PJ).

Portuguese authorities shelved the investigation in 2008, 14 months after Madeleine vanished on May 3, 2007, and in doing so lifted arguidos (formal suspect) status from the McCanns.

"The PJ have never cleared anyone," Sutton said.

Ceasing the investigation "just meant they couldn't find enough evidence to proceed against them. Their view is that the parents are certainly not eliminated".

Sutton, who led more than 30 successful murder investigations, said it was well-rehearsed, best police practice in cases such as Madeleine McCann to eliminate those closest to the child first.

"Also any kind of investigation of murder or akin to murder the other place you need to eliminate early on is those that last saw the victim alive.

"The involvement of the parents, that was dealt with at the time by the original investigation by the Portuguese," Asst Com Rowley said during a media briefing.

"We had a look at all the material and we are happy that was all dealt with and there is no reason whatsoever to reopen that or start rumours that was a line of investigation."

When asked if Kate and Gerry McCann had ever been questioned as potential suspects by Scotland Yard detectives, Asst Com Rowley replied: "No."

Sutton said he disagreed with Asst Com Rowley's assessment. He said inconsistencies in some of Kate and Gerry's statements, Kate's 2011 book madeleine and also some of the witness accounts of the Tapas 7 disturbed him.

The Portugal detective who oversaw the original investigation, Goncalo Amaral, wrote a book theorising Maddie had died in apartment 5A, that Kate and Gerry had disposed of the body and the parents had faked their daughter's abduction.

After police found no forensic evidence in the apartment to back up claims of a break in, Gerry's statements to police detailing what doors he and Kate had used while checking on their three sleeping children changed.

Portugal's police also had some doubts over the accuracy of timelines provided by Kate and Gerry, and the Tapas 7, in the critical hours either side of Maddie being reported missing at 10pm.

Specialist cadaver and blood dogs were brought to Praia da Luz from the UK, and signalled hits inside apartment 5A and a hire car rented by the McCanns 25 days after Madeleine disappeared. DNA swabs were taken but ruled inconclusive.

"There was a part of me that always had this hope in the back of my mind that actually there was lots of busy and important covert work going on in the background of Operation Grange, that there was going to be some kind of bombshell announcement.

"I fear that is not going to be the case now. I fear it will just peter out and probably this thing will never get resolved."

It was "entirely possible" that some of Operation Grange's remit was forced upon Scotland Yard by government officials who rubber stamped the multi-million-dollar funding of the investigation, Sutton said.

In March Operation Grange was injected with an additional $150,000 to cover the investigation through to September, 2017.

In our comment at 14 May 2017, 21:18:00 we have already given our opinion about Mr Sutton.

Please note the difference between what he says in this article and in the one by the Mail that gave him visibility.

In this one he says:

"In 2010, with planning underway to launch Operation Grange, Sutton received a phone tip off from "a very senior Metropolitan police officer", warning him about the looming investigation and how it would be handled.

The insider told Sutton, who served 30 years with London's Met before retiring in 2011, that the dozens of murder detectives assigned to Operation Grange would be instructed where they could and couldn't look.

"I immediately assumed that what was meant was that the [McCann] family and Tapas 7 [the group of seven friends on holiday with the McCanns] were a no-go area," Sutton said."

While on May 3 he said this:

"A detective tipped to head up the Madeleine McCann probe was warned he would be ordered to prove she was abducted and ignore other leads.

Colin Sutton said a high-ranking friend in the Met called him and warned him not to lead the case when Scotland Yard announced it would get involved in 2010.

The source warned that he would be tasked with proving her parents Kate and Gerry were innocent and ignoring any alternatives to the abduction theory, he claims.

Speaking to Martin Brunt on Sky News, he said: 'I did receive a call from a very senior met police officer who knew me and said it wouldn’t be a good idea for me to head investigation on the basis that I wouldn’t be happy conducting an investigation being told where I could go and where I couldn’t go, the things I could investigate and the things I couldn’t.

Asked to clarify what he meant, he added: 'The Scotland Yard investigation was going to be very narrowly focused and that focus would be away from any suspicion of wrongdoing on the part of the McCanns or the tapas friends.'"

"A detective tipped to head up the Madeleine McCann probe was warned he would be ordered to prove she was abducted and ignore other leads.Colin Sutton said a high-ranking friend in the Met called him and warned him not to lead the case when Scotland Yard announced it would get involved in 2010.The source warned that he would be tasked with proving her parents Kate and Gerry were innocent and ignoring any alternatives to the abduction theory, he claims."

But this is no quotation of CS's words, just interpretation of what he said to MB.

On May 3 the Daily Mail article states: "Colin Sutton said a high-ranking friend in the Met called him and warned him not to lead the case when Scotland Yard announced it would get involved in 2010. The source warned that he would be tasked with proving her parents Kate and Gerry were innocent and ignoring any alternatives to the abduction theory, he claims."

On May 15 he says: "The insider told Sutton, who served 30 years with London's Met before retiring in 2011, that the dozens of murder detectives assigned to Operation Grange would be instructed where they could and couldn't look."I immediately assumed that what was meant was that the [McCann] family and Tapas 7 [the group of seven friends on holiday with the McCanns] were a no-go area," Sutton said."

On May 3 he says the "high-ranking friend in the Met" told him that OG was going to be biased in favour of the Mcs. On May 15, he says it was his immediate assumption from the words of his "high-ranking friend in the Met" and not what his friend said.

The words from the Daily Mail are not quotations but it written clearly that he said them.

Mr Sutton, as far as we know, did not complain about being misquoted, misrepresented or misinterpreted in the Daily Mail article. In fact he praised the article on Twitter as per anon comment to our last post "Why?":

"Anonymous 9 May 2017, 15:42:00

Interesting comments on Twitter from Colin Sutton, ex-London DCI, re McCann case. https://twitter.com/colinsutton/with_repliesOne of his Tweets: 1- I hoped Grange was doing other work in the background; 2- When I decided to speak it took a while to find an MSM outlet who would listen."

The last ex SY expert they had on panarama said they were innocent because he said they were. What better way to back that up with someone who publicly announced that he thought SY was a farse but now on reviewing the evidence is convinced of the parents innocence. Is there another panarama on the horizon.

The Panorama program is a sort of ball of fools. Those eccentrics have all in common an extraordinary faith, the kind that moves mountains. Fact checking is not necessary, belief will more than do, belief prevails, belief overrules everything. One of them is supposed to be a PO, when asked how he knows that the MCs aren't involved, he answers that it's obvious, and isn't obvious they're innocent since they weren't there when the child vanished ? A PO ! (Note that the MCs share the same post-truth logic as they blamed themselves for not having been there when the child was abducted...).Leading the ball there's Richard Bilton. Oh, how attentive he listens to the impervious Pedro do Carmo, how much he hopes to pull the truth out of the backstreets of PDL, how knowledgeable he is, as JG, about dogs, in particular about those lamentable, though British, Eddie and Keela, how he does swiftly mention the STJ ruling only in order to destroy it bit by bit of plausibility, the jewel in the crown being Mr Janosh abducting a pillow and proving to the planet the inanity of the PJ.

I don't agree with you, Textusa, about the Daily Mail. It wouldn't be the first time they make up false quotations that just suit them. I find it hard to believe that CS would say openly that OG's task was to prove the MCs' innocence. Had the "high ranking friend" to be explicit, as if CS wouldn't understand what was at stake ? If those quotation is genuine, then better be careful !

One wonders why Jenny Murat would offer such observations to UK journalists most recently (if she did at all) or back in 2007/2008 when the case was warmer, about a woman in purple (Tanner) who accused/fingered her son, Robert, as a possible abductor/murderer and almost 'ruined his life.' If she could have incriminated Tanner in in the early stages when the evidence was still ripe -- spilled it all to the PJ in the very early stages and exonerated her son? Perhaps she's been harbouring a deep seated hatred of Tanner since 2007 and offers these nuggets of information to MSM at intervals? Or is she just doing what's she's been required of her but by those controlling the McCanns, and what is the reward for her, and for her son? Has she been told to, or offered to, construct a narrative that sets up a smoke screen as to the involvement of her son, Robert, and indeed herself. "Don't look there - look here!"

I had got the impression, possibly wrongly, that she had been brought in by 'the other side' to add extra details to the purple woman such that it couldn't have been JT.. i.e. woman now slight, its a purple jacket and a skirt.... so she is doing as she is told. She has always been on the other side..

Does anyone else think that the uproar over Allegation of Trump interfering in a FBI investigation will make Theresa May think before she try's to create a whitewash over the SY investigation. I also think that even if she allows the whole truth to be outed now she still has a lot of explaining of why it has taken this long which will be met with allegations of interference

Theresa May's lack of concern for the MC case put Jim Gamble into a state of utter fury. Though TM had nothing to do with JG's now famous report, he couldn't imagine that she didn't read it first thing when she substituted Alan Johnson, who ordered the report after having been lobbyed by JG himself. When TM finally let him know that she had a look on the report, JG didn't believe her, because she didn't immediately ordered an inquiry. Having a look had likely made TM wonder whether the best was to let time do its work and build slowly indifference or to ask the Yard to review the files as common interest was at stake, as she later claimed. Then pressure was put on Cameron by Medusa Brooks who only admitted, in front of the Leveson Inquiry, to have "persuaded" him (how cute !). If Theresa May's eyes ever fell on Mark Rowley's interview, just imagining her face makes me laugh.http://news.met.police.uk/documents/transcript-of-interview-with-ac-mark-rowley-66743

Comments are welcomed, but its reserved the right to delete comments deemed as spam, transparent attempts to get traffic without providing any useful commentary, and any contributions which are offensive or inappropriate for civilized discourse.

Total Pageviews

MESSAGE to NEWCOMERS

This blog believes that concerning the MADDIE McCANN case the following happened:

- Maddie McCanndied in the early evening of May 3rd, 2007, in the Apartment 5A. We believe the death to have been accidental.

- At the time of Maddie's death the Praia da Luz's Ocean Club was hosting a large swinging holiday in which the McCanns and friends were part of among many others.

- After Maddie's death a cover-up of unseen proportions and scope took place not to hide Maddie's death but with the main purpose of hiding the presence of swinging. To achieve that, Maddie's death had to be hidden.

- We don't believe there was any sort of negligence involved in the Maddie affair. We don't believe that T9 dined at Tapas Bar from Sunday to Wednesday. We think that on those nights they left their children with professional nannies - as did other guests - to go dine downtown PdL. On Thursday night they did use Tapas but that was simply part of what was to be "negligence"that was required to allow Maddie to be "abducted."

PJ Files

Anonymity

A MAJOR MINORITY

TRUTH is Self-Sustained

Think for yourself

Luz - THE VILLAGE OF THE DAMNED

PdL - What a place. Why does anyone holiday there?It's populated by black heroin addicts, people who rob apartments, gypsies who steal scrap and wood, scruffy moustachioed lurers of children, bogus charity collectors, suspicious street musicians, men lurking near phone booths, glasses man lurking in stairwells, blond men suspiciously lurking outside apartments, soothing couples entering apartments without permission, mysterious gangs of cleaners, men taking photographs of children on beaches... And to top it all, you have to queue for a table booking.Anonymous 11Nov 2013 12:22:00

Maybe because you can always enjoy an ice-cream in the rain?And a dip in an icy pool on arrival always attracts a crowd.Textusa 11Nov 2013 12:28:00

I like the Tapas fragile chairs and tables. They wobble nicely when cutting thick grilled steaks spilling the drinks all about! It's fun for the whole family!Anonymous 11Nov 2013 13:08:00

And how about the number of men seen carrying little blond girls in the street in the middle of the night?Anonymous 11Nov 2013 14:04:00

PdL - where families take it in turn to vomit each night, dog packs pursue and bite joggers, guests fall off catamarans, damage tendons playing tennis, have shaving accidents and stagger around apartments bleeding, domestic appliances need repair, shutters jam, baby monitors won't function at restaurants, travel cots can't be assembled.. sounds like THE VILLAGE OF THE DAMNED.Anonymous 12 Nov 2013 12:37:00

Child Catcher

Algarve - THE REGION OF THE DAMNED

“Algarve – Where Chitty Chitty Bang Bang’s Child Catcher found it ideal to roam the streets with his GYPSY-wagon:“There are children here somewhere. I can smell them. Come along, kiddie-winkies!”Algarve, the REGION OF THE DAMNED.”

Please Reconstruct I:

PJ's Declaration for Reopening Process:

"Madeleine McCann

As is the case with any situation in which a child goes missing, notwithstanding formal dismissal of the inquiry into her disappearance, and just as has always been publicly stated, the Polícia Judiciária never stopped paying close attention to any and all information that might possibly shed light on the whereabouts of the minor Madeleine McCann, the circumstances surrounding her disappearance and the identity of the perpetrator(s).

It was with this goal in mind that in March 2011 the National Director of the Polícia Judiciária entrusted a team of investigators from the North Directorate with the mission of reassessing, as a whole, the vast amount of information gathered during the inquiry, aimed at identifying data for which a more in-depth investigation might be useful and possible.

The reassessment which took place over the last two years and a half suggested new evidence to have surfaced, which, requiring the investigation to proceed, meets the requirements set out by section 279(1) of the Portuguese Code of Criminal Procedure for reopening of the inquiry.

Accordingly, a request for reopening was made to the Public Prosecutor for the jurisdiction of Portimao, and approval granted by the latter. "

The Anne Guedes Transcriptions

Permanent Suggested Reading

Quote

“It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled.” Mark Twain

Revelations

"For the righteous, a revelation is a joyous event, the realization of a divine truth but for the wicked, revelations can be far more terrifying, when dark secrets are exposed and sinners are punished for their trespasses." Quote from the TV Series "Revenge" (T2 - Ep9)

Truth

All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.Arthur Schopenhauer

The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it, ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is.Winston Churchill

The Revolution

During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.George Orwell

The Revolution Goes Viral

"Once information networks become social, the implications are massive: truth can now travel faster than lies, and all propaganda becomes instantly flammable. Sure, you can try to insert spin, but the instantly networked consciousness of millions of people will set it right: they act like white blood cells against infection so that ultimately the truth, or something close to it, persists much longer than disinformation"The Guardian (04Jan12)

We must build dikes of courage to hold back the flood of fear. Martin Luther King, Jr.

Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts Winston Churchill

PRECIOUS, SO TRUE, WORDS

“One coincidence, two coincidences – maybe they’re still coincidences. Any more than that and it stops being coincidence.”

Kate McCann

(in MADELEINE, by Kate McCann, published in 2011 by Bantam Press, pg. 328)

Imagine...

"This says it all, Ms Loach hit the nail on the head!

"Ms Loach replied: “Imagine the public believing that you covered up your child’s death and then sought to make money out of it. They feel shame, humiliation and anguish."

Yes, that's exactly what we, the public, believe, because that's exactly what they did! And, their "shame, humiliation and anguish" are because they know we know!"

Comment posted by Anonymous to Textusa at Sep 16, 2013, 8:36:00 AM on "McCann vs Amaral Libel Trial" post referring to Mockumentary maker Emma Loach's testimony on the 1st day of said trial as one of McCann's defense witness.

Legal Disclaimer

This blog expresses exclusively the exchange of ideas and of opinions, between WHITE HATS, so is not responsible for the use, misuse or any form of interpretation (mainly misinterpretation) of its content, as although it uses a public medium, as is the internet, it's of PRIVATE nature, very much like any other conversation that takes place in a restaurant, pub or any other public location, where FREEDOM OF SPEECH is exercised.

Sound Explanation for Viciousness

Compliments from the Maggots' Lair:

- “…all the others pale into insignificance when compared to textusa.”

- “I think she should be on the streets and off the internet"

Chinagirl):

- “Disgusting piece of slime.”

(Raptor):

- “Yikes ! That's disgusting.”

(preciousramotswe):

- “You are right. It's a shambolic mess of vitriol and obtuseness. But then they always are. The one that some claimed finally 'proved' who was carrying who during the Smith sighting is a masterpiece of deliberately confused arguments in which labrynthine plots are used to cover how empty the central thesis is”

Out of the Blue (or... Black?)

Hey textusa How are you? well I hope,just thought I would tell you that there are videos about you on youtube, claiming you are an internet predator who stole her daughters identity and prowls the forums for young boys, they say you are welsh!! I think its a case of mistaken identity because are you not portuguese and male? Anyway great blog. keep it up.(Anon., Nov 13th, 05:43)

Conversation from the "Lightless Zone"

sabot:

“Wot Round Table?”

bonnybraes1:

“He/she/it invented a barking mad 'theory' about no-one actually having eaten in the Tapas, because he/she/it couldn't grasp the table arrangements.”

So, because textusa doesn't understand stuff like that, all the Tapas group, the staff, everyone, were lying.

OMG - you don't suppose textusa is actually Gonc, do you?”

sansouci:“Could be Bonny.

The 'theories' about the table and the watersports are really so far beyond bizarre, that I get the feeling that 'textusa' could actually be 'pisstaka'.”

BLACK BUT TRUE WORDS

“Because no-one is more vicious in their search for payback that those who realise they have allowed themselves to be taken for a fool” (A "boomerang" comment left by an Anonymous (Insane?) at Sep 22, 2012 2:06:00 PM)

Insane's IMPORTANT Comments

“…How would any of you idiots like it if your name came into the public domain because you were witness to a crime, and some mad bitch set up a site in which she called you a liar, and claimed you were actually involved in the crime you witnessed? Just ponder on that for a moment”

Aug 28, 2011 9:27:00 AM

“…Where is your sense of shame or decency in accusing innocent witnesses of being involved in covering up the death of a child?

I see no shame or decency on here - just an utter indifference to the rights or feelings of others.

I notice no-one had the balls to answer my question about how you would feel if this was done to you - if you were a witness to a crime and some deranged cow on the internet accused you of being involved. You are all a complete disgrace.”

Aug 28, 2011 1:09:00 PM

FOOT IN THE MOUTH DISEASE

Insane (Nov 14, 2012 11:37:00 PM):

Oh look here - amazing what one can find out by means of a couple of emails to Mark Warner.

You are toast, lady. Finished.

I am going to enjoy this more than is actually decent.

Textusa (Nov 15, 2012 8:50:00 AM):

Well it seems that you're quite privy with the Ocean Club aren't you?

Them giving YOU the information about their own mails?

And you threatening us based on information that YOU apparently got from the Ocean Club.

That's really interesting, isn't it?

Insane (Nov 15, 2012 10:47:00 PM):

One thing I really like about Mark Warner is how helpful their staff are. Really go the extra mile for someone needing information. IYKWIM

:)

Textusa (Nov 16, 2012 11:17:00 AM):

Thank you for confirming that Mark Warner Staff are supplying YOU with information pertaining the Maddie Affair.

Insane's Moment of Rare Beauty

“It would be more suspicious if every account tallied. Police expect to find contradictions, don't tell me you did not know this?” (Nov 22, 2012 3:38:00 PM), when providing an opinion on contradictions from various statements in the PJ Files.

“I don't give a rat's arse about the statements which tally too closely - of course some of them tally too closely, there is an in depth analysis of them on my blog, the one you are not invited to.” (Nov 22, 2012 4:08:00 PM), when, exactly 30 minutes later, provides an opposite opinion, in this case about the fact that some of Tapas' Staff's statements tally too closely.

Insane the Entrepeneur?

"I'd love to stay, but I have a report to write, and it won't do itself, will it?" (Nov 29, 2012 8:14:00 PM)Insane the Disruptor, a new profession shown inNew Career Opportunities

Insane's Proposal for a New Legal Disclaimer

Textusa's new disclaimer. Please ignore all previous versions

''This blog expresses exclusively the exchange of ideas and opinions between people who have sniffed WAY too many solvents, and the imaginary people who live at the bottom of their garden, and so is not responsible for the enormous fines, possible imprisonment, or lifelong incarceration in a mental hospital which may result from it's content, as although it is on the interclickyweb, it is of a private nature, accompanied only by the voices in their heads, very much like any other conversation which takes place in a psychiatric ward between people rocking backwards and forwards in their seat and eating the wallcoverings, where FREEDOM OF SPEECH is exercised in the half hour per day of free association which the inmates are allowed.''Comment NOT published but submitted on Aug 22, 2011 10:17:00 PM

Kate's Round Table

INSANE'S BLOG

We waited so long for the link...

A possible explanation for the wait: "As I have made perfectly clear, you and your sort will never have access to my blog. We are particular about who we invite, and would not include screaming harpies and riff-faff like yourself."unpublished comment from Insane at Nov 23, 2012 10:55:00 AM

Then, a glimmer of hope?“Publishing elsewhere the posts Textusa refuses to publish is also appropriate - and also gives you fools a chance to read what she withholds from you, knowing that you would desert her if you were aware of how much trouble she leads you into.” (Nov 29, 2012 12:40:00 PM)

No, it wasn’t to be so… :“For the last time, you will never be provided with a link for my blog - you are not welcome there and will never be given access”(Nov 29, 2012 1:38:00 PM)